Colombian journalists had stopped calling things by their real names for fear of threats, abductions or even death. For this reason, the the Medios Para la Paz publishes a dictionary covering terms and topics related to resolving peace and conflict as a tool to defend the accuracy and precision of the information in the face of pressure.
“Have we as journalists become one more actor in the armed conflict that has stricken our country for more than half a century?” and “Can we, with words, with our reports about the war, contribute to the establishment of favorable conditions for peace? These were two questions that back in 1997 gathered a handful of senior reporters in Columbia. It was of absolute necessity that they did something witnessing the rapid and increased degradation of both, war and journalism.
Eduardo Márquez, co-founder and trainer for Medios para la Paz desribes the focus on the development of the dictionary.
“But we did not settle with being simply death notaries in a country where intolerance and the negative to allow a different point of view, have consolidated as the most common and well known means for “solving” conflicts. Neither do we find convenient for our fragile democracy, the recent professional routines of many important media organizations with a tendency to convert the reporter into some kind of worker incited by disproportionate commercial interest.
And so, in a town near Bogotá, with the guidance of Javier Darío Restrepo and Gloria Moreno, when we were about thirty representing two generations of reporters, we got together to analyze a series of articles about war published in national newspapers.
During two days, we untangled the traps within the language connotations, the unbalanced consultation of sources, the distortions introduced by editors in sensationalistic headlines or in the lead, and the mistakes made due to the pressure of deadlines… mistakes committed when time doesn’t allow reflection and these errors feed upon accumulated knowledge and our scale of ideological, political, or religious values, or perspectives on social classes, race or sex.
Most of the articles had been written by irreproachable journalists filled with good intentions and they were in favor of a negotiated solution to our tragic warfare. This concerned us even more, because it indicated there were more professional practices interiorized in newsdesks and were considered to be correct.
Meanwhile, we touched up the new tool aimed at distinguishing the language journalists use from the language of their sources: The Dictionary of Terms of Conflict and Peace, To Disarm the Word. More than 500 terms defined accordingly to the International Human Right, the National Constitution and other codes.
It’s inevitable to remember a comment made by a journalist from Magangué – region with paramilitary influence, after attending a workshop held in Cartagena and with the dictionary in his hand he said: “I didn’t know that the language I used spontaneously could identify me with one group and make me become a target to another group.” Or another journalist of a radio station in south of Tolima, zone of historic presence of FARC, confessed: “Before I publish any article related to issues on law and order or judicial news, I always review with the dictionary of Medios para la Paz. That way, in addition to doing what’s right, I avoid having trouble with guerrilla or with the military.””
Recent Comments